No more new US coal fired power plants. Unless clean coal is a reality. Otherwise, the domestic fleet of existing coal plants is it.

By the way, NSPS standards take effect at proposal, not finalization, so the battle is basically over.

And yes, EPA can do this with their existing authority. The Supreme Court told EPA, twice, that it needs to run its program. And that its program includes greenhouse gases. This is a class case of "Chevron deference," where the agency can do things it can logically defend based on what Congress told it to do. And here EPA is simply applying the Clean Air Act to a regulated air pollutant. The Supreme Court, if precedent holds, will uphold this.

And before you ask, the leading law review article on the topic has my name on it.

I just get upset when people bring up environmental concerns, the other side always jumps to "you hate jobs".

So...I decided to use that argument against them.

20,000 jobs isn't a whole lot in the grand scheme of things, but it surely is important that those 20,000 people remain gainfully employed.

My point was, that the claim that regulation is the sole cause of 'no new coal fired power plants being built' is completely false. We have the technology to build "clean coal power plants"....it's just expensive to do so.

Now, if we want to debate whether or not the government who imposes the regulations should foot part of the bill for helping companies meet those regulations, that's fine. But to say the government is "killing coal" is a gross oversimplification of the issue.

WVisHome wrote: With 20,000 coal jobs, that means approximately 1.1% of West Virginians are employed by the coal companies.

Those are stupid and misleading statistics. There are more people in our State whose livelihood is tied to the mining and power generation industries than your faulty data shows. They just all don't work directly in the industries. Vendors, contractors, electrical supply companies, heavy equipment manufacturers, doctors, food service personnel, lawyers,...and the list goes on. Many companies base their success on supporting the mining industry. And there are less miners now than in 1900 for the same reason there are similarly fewer jobs in other industries. Technology has made it possible to do more with less people.

Then, look at the tax revenue that the mining industry and related support industries generate for our State. Money that's used to provide programs that assist the citizens of West Virginia.

There are more people in our State whose livelihood is tied to the mining and power generation industries than your faulty data shows. They just all don't work directly in the industries. Vendors, contractors, electrical supply companies, heavy equipment manufacturers, doctors, food service personnel, lawyers,...and the list goes on.

I agree 100%, however I will point out that (for whatever reason) there has been little success in diversifying. I've been of the opinion for a long time that my home state needs desperately to diversify its economy. I don't know how to do that, but it needs to happen. King Coal was dethroned a long time ago, and his power lessons more each year, for good or bad.

I wish our State's economy would become more diversified, as well. But, it's not, and the prospects that it will become so in the near term is slim. That still doesn't change the fact that much of our State's economic fortunes and employment, at the present time, are still tied to the mining industry, whether directly or indirectly. I fail to understand why any citizen of our State would support those who promote policies that undermine the well-being of our citizens and the fiscal prospects for our State. Maybe they're trying to force diversification. I don't see that working out so well or being in the best interests of West Virginia or it's citizens.

wvman75 wrote:I wish our State's economy would become more diversified, as well. But, it's not, and the prospects that it will become so in the near term is slim. That still doesn't change the fact that much of our State's economic fortunes and employment, at the present time, are still tied to the mining industry, whether directly or indirectly. I fail to understand why any citizen of our State would support those who promote policies that undermine the well-being of our citizens and the fiscal prospects for our State. Maybe they're trying to force diversification. I don't see that working out so well or being in the best interests of West Virginia or it's citizens.

Well, economic well being and fiscal soundness are only two issues. There are many more, both legitimate and contrived.

I'm not sure I agree continuing to expand and centralize your economy on a potentially shrinking market is ultimately for the good of the state, and if the end result will be a much more painful crash as we continue to put off diversification in favor of the "easy" choice.

zwaaa wrote: I'm not sure I agree continuing to expand and centralize your economy on a potentially shrinking market is ultimately for the good of the state

That's a fine sentiment. Of course, part of the reason that the market is shrinking is because of the regulatory policies that are being pursued. I can't see the justification in pointing to a shrinking market for coal, if they caused it to begin with.

I do agree with the benefits of our State becoming a more diversified economy. I guess liberal policies are going to make that happen by shrinking the coal market?

Interesting stuff. It looks like there were a couple periods where employment vs production made huge departures - around 1950 and 1980. Any idea what caused those? I guess around 1980 was when strip mining really got going wasn't it? But what was 1950? No idea on that one.

Also. you mentioned the ability to make coal plants clean today. We can definitely make them cleaner but I don't think clean is possible.